[footie]

AMS - Audi RS5 TEST

First test of the new RS5. Final rating: 5/5 stars

Engine: V8, 450 hp, 430 Nm
Gearbox: 7-speed-double-clutch (with Launch Control)
Brakes: ceramic
Tyres: Pirelli P Zero
Weight: 1780 kg
Vmax.: 250 km/h (limited)
0-50 km/h in 1,7 s
0-100 km/h in 4,5 s (M3 DKG: 4,6 s)
0-160 km/h in 10,1 s
0-200 km/h in 16,1 s (M3 DKG: 16,0 s)
400 metres: 12,7 s (179 km/h)
Flexibility (80-120 km/h): 4,4 s/6,1 s/8,1 s/10,6 s (4th/5th/6th/7th gear)
18 m slalom: 66,5 km/h
110 m evasive test: 139,4 km/h
Braking distance (100-0 km/h): 33,3 m/33,4 m (cold/warm)
Basic price: €77.700,-
Price as tested: €102.271,-

As with all early press car it was fully loaded with just about every possible option to the tune of almost 25K of optional kit which apart from making the thing seem hellish expensive it also have the effect of taking the edge off the performance.

[Boost Gomez]

Not impressed.

[dirtyylicous]

Nice

Its def the nicest looking car under 100k

[graider]

um.....performance wise it seems to be about the same as m3 dct?

not very good consider how much time they have available to beat the m3. I was expecting it to murder the m3 in every aspect.

anyone has track time against the m3 dct?

[footie]

Originally Posted by graider

um.....performance wise it seems to be about the same as m3 dct?

not very good consider how much time they have available to beat the m3. I was expecting it to murder the m3 in every aspect.

anyone has track time against the m3 dct?

It would never murder an M3, that was never the intent, but it will beat it in many ways which when totalled up will show that Audi have made progress and will justify the development time. Many of us wanted Audi to wait a year, enough time to develop the FI unit but the decision was taken to bring it sooner rather than later. One thing I do think needs to be remembered is that this is one set of results and with a fully loaded car.

[gonzo]

Not saying good or bad but this car is starting to remind me of the Maserati GT-S. Gorgeous, quick but not blazing, loaded out with options and a wee heavy. For me personally I don't need a car like this/these to be a sub 4 second 0-60 car or really care how fast it makes it around a loop.

They are nice GT cars period.

[M3_WC]

No question a great car...

... but I think Audi was scared to put a more potent powerplant in it. We don't want it to out perform the R8, do we.

[Archon]

Originally Posted by footie

AMS - Audi RS5 TEST

First test of the new RS5. Final rating: 5/5 stars

Engine: V8, 450 hp, 430 Nm
Gearbox: 7-speed-double-clutch (with Launch Control)
Brakes: ceramic
Tyres: Pirelli P Zero
Weight: 1780 kg
Vmax.: 250 km/h (limited)
0-50 km/h in 1,7 s
0-100 km/h in 4,5 s (M3 DKG: 4,6 s)
0-160 km/h in 10,1 s
0-200 km/h in 16,1 s (M3 DKG: 16,0 s)
400 metres: 12,7 s (179 km/h)
Flexibility (80-120 km/h): 4,4 s/6,1 s/8,1 s/10,6 s (4th/5th/6th/7th gear)
18 m slalom: 66,5 km/h
110 m evasive test: 139,4 km/h
Braking distance (100-0 km/h): 33,3 m/33,4 m (cold/warm)
Basic price: €77.700,-
Price as tested: €102.271,-

As with all early press car it was fully loaded with just about every possible option to the tune of almost 25K of optional kit which apart from making the thing seem hellish expensive it also have the effect of taking the edge off the performance.

haha, way to spin things. Option kit making it seem hellish expensive and edge off the performance. Isn't part of that kit the expensive ceramic brakes that should improve performance?

Let's be real here, the M3 I'm sure they tested in the past didn't just have DCT and nothing else

As to the performance numbers itself.....not impressed.....borderline fail. Considering this car will be here in the states LATE 2011.....come that time it will be a fail.

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Not saying good or bad but this car is starting to remind me of the Maserati GT-S. Gorgeous, quick but not blazing, loaded out with options and a wee heavy. For me personally I don't need a car like this/these to be a sub 4 second 0-60 car or really care how fast it makes it around a loop.

They are nice GT cars period.

+1

That is why I would take a Maserati GranTurismo S over an Audi RS5, it is IMHO the most beautiful coupe ever built, it is more exclusive, but also more expensive. Unfortunately the Maserati looks too good for its performance. I would love a street legal MC version (Maserati GranTurismo MC).
About the RS5, I still think it is more an M6 rival than an M3 rival due to practical reasons. Most buy the M3 for its driving and handling both with practicality and place, so as daily drivability. The M6 so as the RS5 are more high performance GT's, RS5 having the advantage of AWD, what is very appreciated in Swiss and other places were people think to need AWD. An RS5 is good as an "only one car" or near a car as an Audi A3 TDI.

[footie]

Originally Posted by Archon

haha, way to spin things. Option kit making it seem hellish expensive and edge off the performance. Isn't part of that kit the expensive ceramic brakes that should improve performance?

Let's be real here, the M3 I'm sure they tested in the past didn't just have DCT and nothing else

As to the performance numbers itself.....not impressed.....borderline fail. Considering this car will be here in the states LATE 2011.....come that time it will be a fail.

I can't comment on the spec of M3s that have been tested in the past, all I can confirm is the spec of this RS5 is boarderline mental with almost every extras under the sun. You are right that the ceramics reduce the weight, as does the sports Recaros but the sportdiff, dynamic steering and all the other equipment more than simply cancel out these benefits, this RS5 is one heavy mother.

Regarding the opinion it's a fail in performance terms, compared to what? Without a true comparison with the main competition how can you possibly come to such a conclusion. And in any case there is much much more to performance than what a car is capable of in a straight line, if there is one thing BMW have banged on about is that handling is a major part of performance and I can assure you that the RS5 is a very capable handling car.

But by all means you continue to preach this opinion because I doubt Audi were thinking of you when they thought up this car anyway.

[amgthis]

Originally Posted by Levi

+1

That is why I would take a Maserati GranTurismo S over an Audi RS5, it is IMHO the most beautiful coupe ever built, it is more exclusive, but also more expensive. Unfortunately the Maserati looks too good for its performance. I would love a street legal MC version (Maserati GranTurismo MC).
About the RS5, I still think it is more an M6 rival than an M3 rival due to practical reasons. Most buy the M3 for its driving and handling both with practicality and place, so as daily drivability. The M6 so as the RS5 are more high performance GT's, RS5 having the advantage of AWD, what is very appreciated in Swiss and other places were people think to need AWD. An RS5 is good as an "only one car" or near a car as an Audi A3 TDI.

That is a direct result though. Exclusivity rises as price does.

[dirtyylicous]

^^^^ Thats my opinion buddy...

May I ask what you think is better looking under 100k? No hate, just curious

[Archon]

Originally Posted by footie

I can't comment on the spec of M3s that have been tested in the past, all I can confirm is the spec of this RS5 is boarderline mental with almost every extras under the sun. You are right that the ceramics reduce the weight, as does the sports Recaros but the sportdiff, dynamic steering and all the other equipment more than simply cancel out these benefits, this RS5 is one heavy mother.

Regarding the opinion it's a fail in performance terms, compared to what? Without a true comparison with the main competition how can you possibly come to such a conclusion. And in any case there is much much more to performance than what a car is capable of in a straight line, if there is one thing BMW have banged on about is that handling is a major part of performance and I can assure you that the RS5 is a very capable handling car.

But by all means you continue to preach this opinion because I doubt Audi were thinking of you when they thought up this car anyway.

It is fail compared to how long it took to develop the car, the numbers presented and the cost of the car.

There are 2 performance numbers referencing the M3, is that the articles numbers or something you inserted. Either way it's being compared to the M3 as I read it since the reference is there. So where are the rest of the fill in the blank numbers for the slalom, etc? Where are the M3 numbers? As I will have to wait until late 2011 to even test drive the car, EU articles are the only thing we can go by in the states and so far they have been less than stellar in the UK.

If it's not meant to murder the M3, what is it.....a S5 Killer for more than a GTR price?

If you must know, for the price tag I saw... I was commenting on performance fail not against the M3 mind you but the Nissan GTR. Sorry for leaving that bit out earlier.

I think we all appreciate you posting these RS5 articles, but when you do so and then make excuses for the results....it's a bit telling mate

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by amgthis

That is a direct result though. Exclusivity rises as price does.

I think it's the other way round. A 140.000 € M3 won't make the M3 more exclusive, but just overpriced and nobody will buy it.

[footie]

It's illogical posts like this that make me feel I need to reply and appear such an Audi fan.

Originally Posted by Archon

It is fail compared to how long it took to develop the car, the numbers presented and the cost of the car.

Based purely on the data comparing the RS4 to the E92M3 one could also assume the same opinion which would in fact be totally wrong. There is much more to a car than acceleration figures but to base your opinion on simply those it gives the impression (how ever wrong) that you are overly shallow.

Originally Posted by Archon

There are 2 performance numbers referencing the M3, is that the articles numbers or something you inserted. Either way it's being compared to the M3 as I read it since the reference is there. So where are the rest of the fill in the blank numbers for the slalom, etc? Where are the M3 numbers? As I will have to wait until late 2011 to even test drive the car, EU articles are the only thing we can go by in the states and so far they have been less than stellar in the UK.

I believe those two stats for the M3 are from an earlier test conducted by AMS on the equivalent car, i.e. the M-DCT M3. About the reviews conducted in the UK, the two less than stellar reviews are from EVO and CAR, yet Autocar and almost all of the others have been extremely promising, in fact glowly praise is how I would have described it.

I suppose it's how you want to view things.

Originally Posted by Archon

If it's not meant to murder the M3, what is it.....a S5 Killer for more than a GTR price?

In your opinion did the M3 murder the RS4? Of course not, so what was it ...... a 335i killer for close on GTR money?

Lets stick with the facts we know and not assume pricing.

Originally Posted by Archon

If you must know, for the price tag I saw... I was commenting on performance fail not against the M3 mind you but the Nissan GTR. Sorry for leaving that bit out earlier.

Again, since the M3 is close to GTR money does that somehow make it a fail? Again of course not because the simply truth is that neither the M3 or RS5 are trying to compete on the same level as the Nissan, it was solely designed to beat the 997turbo. And anyway who in their right mind would consider the 997turbo a fail for charging almost double the price of the GTR and only offering the same level of performance.

At what point does this argument of failure start to sound childish.

Originally Posted by Archon

I think we all appreciate you posting these RS5 articles, but when you do so and then make excuses for the results....it's a bit telling mate

Not telling at all, I was simply highlighting the fact that the car in question was fully loaded which any logical person would know will affect the results as weight is the biggest enemy of the performance car. At least Audi are being honest and offering the worse case scenario instead of supplying a trimmed to the bone RS5 that no one will ever buy and never achieve the figures that are posted. To prove this point, the M3 has been quoted as low as 4.2s to 60mph and low 9s to 100mph yet I never achieved anything close to that with mine and nor did Chris from EVO.

[graider]

Originally Posted by dirtyylicous

^^^^ Thats my opinion buddy...

May I ask what you think is better looking under 100k? No hate, just curious

m3 and it is 60k.

[BMWCadet]

Originally Posted by graider

m3 and it is 60k.

Certainly not yours, i'm glad you added the price to clarify.

[Black Sheep]

GTR>RS5

Originally Posted by dirtyylicous

^^^^ Thats my opinion buddy...

May I ask what you think is better looking under 100k? No hate, just curious

[UltimateBMW]

Originally Posted by dirtyylicous

Nice

Its def the nicest looking car under 100k

Originally Posted by footie

Price as tested: €102.271

[UltimateBMW]

Thanks for posting the numbers footie. I'm jealous of the ceramic brakes.

[TK-421]

Originally Posted by UltimateBMW

[TK-421]

Originally Posted by BMWCadet

Certainly not yours, i'm glad you added the price to clarify.

Whoa, I didn't know Captain Obvious was on the forums...



I'm not so sure about "certainly." I personally believe the E46 looks better in almost all aspects than the E92 and I know for a fact that I'm not the only one.